Talk:Nightcrawler (film)

Cinematography
I have some, what I believe may be, interesting information, but I'm unsure how to embed it in the article. "In some of the film's scenes, Lou Bloom, the character played by Jake Gyllenhaal, takes upon himself the duties of a cinematographer. Robert Elswit, the film's cinematographer, is Gyllenhaal godfather." --82.136.210.153 (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * This is most likely untrue. See Talk:Jake Gyllenhaal. It appears that Gyllenhaal is not a reliable primary source. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 13:20, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

"Psychopath"
I vote against calling the protagonist a psychopath, or a sociopath, or anything else like that. These are medical terms and shouldn't be used lightly; to say someone (even fictional) is a psychopath is a big claim, and using it flippantly or euphemistically (for someone otherwise unpredictable, violent, manipulative etc) without proper sourcing trivializes psychopathy the disorder.

Lou Bloom isn't diagnosed as a psychopath in the film; we could describe him as violent and manipulative, but not psychopathic. Critics have described him as psychopathic, but that's their interpretation, and they're probably being more flippant than precise, in the same way they might call a character "insane". Popcornduff (talk) 17:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * For why Popcornduff started this discussion, see here, here, here and here. That third diff-link concerns Category:Films about psychopaths. Anyway, editors keep adding, in one way or another, that Lou Bloom is a psychopath, and Popcornduff keeps removing the material as unsourced. I keep pointing out that the material is sourced in the Reception section because various critics call Lou Bloom a psychopath or sociopath (note that sociopath redirects to the Psychopath article after debates about whether or not "socioptath" should be a standalone article). In fact, it seems that critics are in general agreement that Lou Bloom is a psychopath/sociopath, and, from what I know of psychopathy, I wouldn't call their assessment incorrect on that. Either way, I don't feel strongly one way or the other on definitively calling Lou Bloom a psychopath or sociopath in the article. Flyer22 (talk) 17:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * The character's sociopathy is as crucial to his quest as a cowboy's horse or a spaceman's helmet. If he had any empathy, he wouldn't have climbed the ladder and the plot wouldn't have moved. We don't need medical sources to call someone a psychopath, just a reviewer's description. Death is a far more serious medical condition than a mind for business is, and we never need a doctor (real or fictional) to declare a character dead. It's just right there on the screen, for about two hours straight. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:21, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm reviving this discussion since this category has been repeatedly added recently. There is nothing in the article that supports this categorization, and the opinions of film fans that he is "obviously" a psychopath is completely irrelevant. Categories have to be supported by the article content and have to be definitive:


 * WP:CATVER – "Categorization of articles must be verifiable. It should be clear from verifiable information in the article why it was placed in each of its categories."
 * WP:NON-DEFINING – "Categorization by non-defining characteristics should be avoided."

Neither of these thresholds have been met, not even close. ---  The Old Jacobite  The '45  14:22, 9 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Not suitable for inclusion in that category. Popcornduff (talk) 14:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Comment I agree with Popcornduff. It is not clear from either the plot or sourced content within the article that the character is a psychopath, and if such content is going to be added to the article it needs to be based on sources more authoritative than those added here. Betty Logan (talk) 17:06, 9 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The protagonist easily meets the criteria for both psychopathy & ASPD. It certainly is defining of him - he's extremely ruthless and arrogant. He lies and breaks the law frequently, trespasses into houses, drives dangerously, has no conscience or fear & doesn't care about anyone but himself. He causes his main rival to be severely injured, pressures a woman into sex and has his assistant killed. A person who does not have such a condition would not be able to do as he does. Jim Michael (talk) 05:00, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Name uniformity in "Plot" section
The main character was referred to as "Bloom" throughout entire article until the last sentence, when he was referred to as "Lou". I changed the "Lou" to "Bloom" to be congruent with the rest of the article. Gil gosseyn (talk) 03:38, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

No "Cast" section?
So, I was trying to look up one of the actors on the film's page, and I noticed there's no "Cast" section, like on many other movies' pages? Anyone else noticed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LyteSpawn (talk • contribs) 23:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * See the GA Review above "I would drop the Cast section entirely". Various editors have gone through phases of thinking this was somehow a good idea, some arguing for and against including the actor names directly in the plot section, others arguing that a tiny table of cast members is good idea, others have shown that a detailed Production and Casting section can also work. There are various different ways that work in theory, but in practice it results in a a mess of inconsistencies, which more than outweighs any supposed benefits.
 * I'm glad to see the above editor went ahead and restored a simple Cast list after the Plot section. -- 109.76.203.103 (talk) 06:15, 5 February 2021 (UTC)